Gauhati HC Sets Aside Order Denying Senior Teacher In-Charge Principal Post Over B.Ed. Degree Obtained Without Departmental Permission
The Gauhati High Court held that a B.Ed. degree obtained from a recognised university without prior departmental permission cannot be invalidated under Rule 13 of the Assam Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1965, and directed that the petitioner—the senior-most qualified Post Graduate Teacher in the school—be allowed to hold charge of the post of Principal.
The Gauhati High Court, in a judgment pronounced on 13 July 2026, set aside a January 2023 order of the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, which had denied Mrs. Mallika Devi—a senior Post Graduate Teacher at T.C. Government Girls’ H.S. & M.P. School, Guwahati—the charge of the post of Principal. The Director had instead entrusted that charge to a teacher junior to the petitioner, on the ground that the petitioner had obtained her B.Ed. degree without prior permission from the appointing authority, thereby violating Rule 13 of the Assam Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1965. Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair, sitting singly, held that Rule 13 cannot be used to invalidate a degree obtained from a recognised university. The consequence of such a violation, the Court said, is a potential disciplinary proceeding—not the erasure of the degree itself.
The Dispute Before the High Court
Mrs. Mallika Devi was initially appointed as a Subject Teacher in Assamese on 2 January 1995 under Regulation 3(f) of the Assam Public Service Commission (Limitation of Functions) Regulations, 1951, and was posted at Government Girls’ H.S. School, Dhubri. She was appointed on a regular basis by order dated 2 March 2001 on a recommendation from the Assam Public Service Commission, and was later transferred to T.C. Government Girls’ H.S. & M.P. School, Guwahati.
In the State-wide Draft Gradation List of Post Graduate Teachers published on 15 July 2021, Mrs. Mallika Devi was placed at serial number 68. The fifth respondent, Mrs. Subhalakshmi Barooah, an Assistant Teacher at the same school, figured at serial number 80, with her date of joining in the Post Graduate cadre recorded as 11 March 1996.
When the incumbent Principal of the school retired on reaching superannuation with effect from 31 January 2023, the petitioner, being the senior-most qualified Post Graduate Teacher in the school, expected to be entrusted with charge of the principal post. Instead, the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, by order dated 27 January 2023, directed that Mrs. Subhalakshmi Barooah hold charge of the post, along with financial powers, with effect from 1 February 2023.
The Director’s stated reason was that only Mrs. Barooah had obtained her B.Ed. degree with departmental permission, having been deputed for the course. Other teachers senior to her in the seniority list—including the petitioner—could not produce the appointing authority’s permission for pursuing their B.Ed. courses. Invoking Rule 13 of the Assam Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1965, the Director treated those teachers, including the petitioner, as ineligible to hold charge of the principal post.
Mrs. Mallika Devi made a representation to the Director seeking reconsideration. When it drew no response, she filed WP(C) No. 3643/2025 before the Gauhati High Court, challenging the order of 27 January 2023. During the pendency of that petition, the Deputy Director of Secondary Education, Assam, conducted a hearing on 4 June 2025 on the petitioner’s representation. The resulting hearing report rejected her claim. She then filed WP(C) No. 234/2026, additionally challenging that hearing report. Both petitions were taken up together for final disposal with the consent of the parties.
The Legal Issue: What Rule 13 Can and Cannot Do
Rule 13 of the Assam Civil Service (Conduct) Rules, 1965 requires that no Government servant, while in service, shall join or attend any educational institution for the purpose of preparing for, or appear at any examination of a recognised Board or University, without obtaining previous permission from the appointing authority. The proviso allows the appointing authority to refuse such permission in the interest of public service.
The State’s counsel, Ms. H. Terangpi, appearing as Standing Counsel for the Secondary Education Department, argued that B.Ed. is a mandatory qualification for promotion to the post of Principal of a Government Higher Secondary School, and that a B.Ed. degree acquired without departmental permission is not reckonable in law. On that basis, she submitted, the petitioner could not be treated as eligible even for an in-charge arrangement.
The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. M. Sarma, countered that the B.Ed. degree was obtained from a recognised institution and its validity cannot be negated merely because prior permission was not sought. He pointed out that no departmental proceedings had ever been initiated against the petitioner for the alleged violation of Rule 13. He relied on the Court’s earlier decision in Tankeswar Nath v. State of Assam and Others, order dated 18 December 2023 passed in WP(C) No. 5419/2023.
Mr. Sarma also noted that the teacher placed immediately above the petitioner in the school’s seniority, one Bandana Thakuria, does not possess a B.Ed. degree. The petitioner, therefore, was the senior-most Post Graduate Teacher in the school who held all the requisite qualifications.
How the Court Reasoned
Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair drew a clear line between the procedural obligation imposed by Rule 13 and the validity of the degree itself. The Rule mandates prior permission before joining any course of study. A failure to obtain that permission is a misconduct for which the employer may initiate disciplinary proceedings. But the Rule does not, and cannot, operate to invalidate a degree that has been duly awarded by a recognised university.
The Court extracted the text of Rule 13 and observed that its provisions “cannot be invoked to invalidate any degree acquired by a Government employee, the course of study for which, the Government employee had prosecuted from a recognized institution, on the ground that it was so pursued without previous permission from the authorities.”
The Court then applied its earlier ruling in Tankeswar Nath, which had in turn followed Smt. Mouchumi Saharia v. Smriti Rekha Kalita & 3 Others (IA(c) 2615/2023, order dated 28 September 2023). In Mouchumi Saharia, the Court had held that obtaining a degree without prior permission amounts to a misconduct under Rule 13, and the appropriate response is a proceeding under the Assam Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1964. The degree itself, however, is governed by Section 22 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, and remains valid. Invalidating the degree—or even impliedly treating it as invalid by denying the service benefits that flow from it—is not within the competence of the departmental authorities.
In Tankeswar Nath, the Court had applied this principle to set aside an order denying the in-charge principal post to a teacher on the ground that his M.A. degree was obtained without prior permission. The Court there found that since the degree was from a recognised university, it was “otherwise valid and acceptable in law,” and a legal right had accrued to the teacher to hold charge of the principal post.
Justice N. Unni Krishnan Nair applied the same reasoning to the present case. The petitioner’s B.Ed. degree was obtained from a recognised university and is valid in law. No departmental proceeding had been initiated against her as of 27 January 2023 on the basis of the alleged misconduct. The petitioner fulfilled the eligibility criteria for the post of Principal. She is senior to the fifth respondent both in the State-wide Post Graduate Teacher gradation list and within the school. The direction to allow the junior teacher to hold charge accordingly could not stand.
The hearing report prepared by the Deputy Director following the 4 June 2025 hearing was also found to not merit acceptance, since it rested on the same legally untenable premise.
Outcome
The Court allowed both writ petitions. The order dated 27 January 2023, issued by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, entrusting Mrs. Subhalakshmi Barooah with the charge of Principal of T.C. Government Girls’ H.S. & M.P. School, Guwahati, was set aside. The hearing report prepared by the Deputy Director of Secondary Education following the hearing on 4 June 2025 was also set aside.
The matter was remanded to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, with a direction to pass appropriate orders allowing Mrs. Mallika Devi to hold charge of the post of Principal of T.C. Government Girls’ H.S. & M.P. School, Guwahati, until the post is filled on a regular basis. The Director was directed to pass such orders within 15 days of receiving a certified copy of the judgment from the petitioner.
WP(C) No. 234/2026 and WP(C) No. 3643/2025 were disposed of accordingly.